ArticlemAbs
10
Article in mAbs. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proceedings of the 15mAbs · 2025Article
- Untoward immune effects of modern medication.Journal of biomedical research · 2023Article
- International consortium for innovation and quality: An industry perspective on the nonclinical and early clinical development of intravitreal drugs.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Importance and Considerations of Antibody Engineering in Antibody-Drug Conjugates Development from a Clinical Pharmacologist's Perspective.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Is There a Role for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Patients with Hidradenitis Suppurativa on Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Inhibitors?American journal of clinical dermatology · 2021Article
- Public Health Impact of Using Biosimilars, Is Automated Follow up Relevant?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Review
- Regulatory and strategic considerations for addressing immunogenicity and related responses in biopharmaceutical development programs.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 15 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Therapeutic proteins and emerging gene and cell-based therapies are attractive therapeutic tools for addressing unmet medical needs or when earlier conventional treatment approaches failed. However, the development of an immune response directed against therapeutic agents is a significant concern as it occurs in a substantial number of cases across products and indications. The specific anti-drug antibodies that develop can lead to safety adverse events as well as inhibition of drug activity or accelerated clearance, both phenomena resulting in loss of treatment efficacy. The European Immunogenicity Platform (EIP) is a meeting place for experts and newcomers to the immunogenicity field, designed to stimulate discussion amongst scientists across industry and academia, encourage interactions with regulatory agencies and share knowledge and the state-of-the-art of immunogenicity sciences with the broader scientific community. Here we report on the main topics covered during the EIP 10th Open Symposium on Immunogenicity of Biopharmaceuticals held in Lisbon, 26-27 February 2019, and the 1-d training course on practical and regulatory aspects of immunogenicity held ahead of the conference. These main topics included immunogenicity testing, clinical relevance of immunogenicity, immunogenicity prediction, regulatory aspects, tolerance induction as a mean to mitigate immunogenicity and immunogenicity in the context of gene therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.